PEN-e from Pace Law School Library: May 2012

Wednesday, May 23, 2012

Third Annual Choose Clean Water Conference

Join local watershed organizations, clean water advocates, policy experts, and government officials from across the Chesapeake region for the third annual Choose Clean Water Conference. The event will feature panel discussions, workshops, and networking opportunities to learn about the latest clean water solutions at the local, state, and federal levels.

Our host city, Lancaster, Pennsylvania, offers powerful examples of how restoration programs produce results—and the ongoing work that needs to be done.

The health of our national parks in the Chesapeake region depends on the health of the waters that flow through and around them. Please join other national park lovers in the region in Lancaster next month!

Conference Details

WHAT: The Choose Clean Water Coalition’s 3rd Annual Conference

WHEN: Monday - Wednesday, June 4 - 6, 2012

WHERE: Lancaster, PA at the Marriott Lancaster at Penn Square

CONTACT: Deb Kleiner at kleinerd@nwf.org

OTHER INFO: To register, please visit http://www.regonline.com/choosecleanwaterconf. The conference registration is $175 (enter the code "DISC" into the registration form to ensure this price). This fee includes all workshops, plenary sessions, field trips, and all meals except Monday's dinner. Scholarships are also available. For an application, please email Deb Kleiner at kleinerd@nwf.org.

Recent Law Review Articles -- May 2012

ADMINISTRATIVE LAW. Camacho, Alejandro E. A learning collaboratory: improving federal climate change adaptation planning. 2011 BYU L. Rev. 1821-1861 (2011).

Freeman, Jody and Jim Rossi. Agency coordination in shared regulatory space. 125 Harv. L. Rev. 1131-1211 (2012).

Macey, Gregg P. Environmental crisis and the paradox of organizing. 2011 BYU L. Rev. 2063-2114 (2011).

Shapiro, Sidney A. The complexity of regulatory capture: diagnosis, causality, and remediation. 17 Roger Williams U. L. Rev. 221-257 (2012).

AGRICULTURE.

Salkin, Patricia E. Honey, it’s all the buzz: regulating neighborhood beehives. 39 B.C. Envtl. Aff. L. Rev. 55-71 (2012).

AIR POLLUTION.

Turney, John B. and Nicholas “Nick” Ybarra. Recent development. Air quality. 41 Tex. Envtl. L.J. 327-330 (2011).

Turney, John B. and student Aaron Tucker. Recent development. Air quality. 42 Tex. Envtl. L.J. 109-111 (2011).

ALTERNATIVE ENERGY.

Frulla, David E., George M. Hagerman, Jr. and Michele G. Hallowell. Found in the wind: the value of early consultation and collaboration with other ocean users for successful offshore wind development. 17 Roger Williams U. L. Rev. 307-326 (2012).

Plaskov, Justin. Comment. Geothermal’s prior appropriation problem. 83 U. Colo. L. Rev. 257-306 (2011).

Rule, Troy A. Renewable energy and the neighbors. 2010 Utah L. Rev. 1223-1276.

ALTERNATIVE FUELS.

Hunziker, Heather. Note. Finding promise in pond scum: algal biofuels, regulation, and the potential for environmental problems. 42 Tex. Envtl. L.J. 59-83 (2011).

ANIMAL LAW.

Kenny, Krysten. A local approach to a national problem: local ordinances as a means of curbing puppy mill production and pet overpopulation. 75 Alb. L. Rev. 379-406 (2011/2012).

Rasmussen, Claire E. Are animal rights dead meat? 41 Sw. L. Rev. 253-264 (2012).

Serafino, Laurie. No walk in the dog park: drafting animal cruelty statutes to resolve double jeopardy concerns and eliminate unfettered prosecutorial discretion. 78 Tenn. L. Rev. 1119-1169 (2011).

ARCTIC.

Anderson, H. Edwin, III. Polar shipping, the forthcoming Polar Code and implications for the polar environments. 43 J. Mar. L. & Com. 59-83 (2012).

BIODIVERSITY.

Mueller, Troy M. Comment. Because I asked you nicely: defining prior informed consent under the Convention on Biological Diversity. 18 Sw. J. Int’l L. 393-415 (2011).

CLEAN WATER ACT.

Reagen, Chris. Comment. The water transfers rule: how an EPA rule threatens to undermine the Clean Water Act. (Friends of the Everglades v. S. Fla. Water Mgmt. Dist., 570 F.3d 1210, 2009.) 83 U. Colo. L. Rev. 307-338 (2011).

CLIMATE CHANGE.

Daniels, Brigham. Addressing global climate change in an age of political climate change. 2011 BYU L. Rev. 1899-1935 (2011).

Verchick, Robert R.M. and Abby Hall. Adapting to climate change while planning for disaster: footholds, rope lines, and the Iowa floods. 2011 BYU L. Rev. 2203-2250 (2011).

COASTAL AREAS.

Thompson, Robert. Beach access, trespass, and the social enactment of property. 17 Roger Williams U. L. Rev. 351-372 (2012).

COMPARATIVE LAW.

Robertson, Heidi Gorovitz. Public access to private land for walking: environmental and individual responsibility as rationale for limiting the right to exclude. 23 Geo. Int’l Envtl. L. Rev. 211-262 (2011).

Stevens, Lisa. Ballenger-Green Diversity Paper. Note. The illusion of sustainable development: how Nigeria’s environmental laws are failing the Niger Delta. 36 Vt. L. Rev. 387-407 (2011).

CONSERVATION EASEMENTS.

Owley, Jessica. The enforceability of exacted conservation easements. 36 Vt. L. Rev. 261-302 (2011).

Serkin, Christopher. Entrenching environmentalism: private conservation easements over public land. 77 U. Chi. L. Rev. 341-366 (2010).

COST/BENEFIT ANALYSIS.

Muranovic, Sanja. Note. Cost-benefit analysis in environmental regulation: the case of impingement and entrainment and what to take away from ... (Entergy Corp. v. Riverkeeper, Inc., 129 S.Ct. 1498, 2009.) 41 Tex. Envtl. L.J. 309-326 (2011).

DISASTERS

Disasters and the Environment Symposium. Introduction by Daniel Farber; articles by Alejandro E. Camacho, Robin Kundis Craig, Brigham Daniels, Lincoln L. Davies, Blake Hudson, Gregg P. Macey, Lesley K. McAllister, Lisa Grow Sun, Robert R.M. Verchick and Abby Hall. 2011 BYU L. Rev. 1783-2250 (2011).

ELECTRICAL UTILITIES.

DiSegna, David M. Student article. In re Review of Proposed Town of New Shoreham Project: a survey and commentary on an important decision for Rhode Island’s renewable energy development. (In re of Proposed New Shoreham Project, 25 A.3d 482, 2011.) 17 Roger Williams U. L. Rev. 327-350 (2012).

Forbush, John R. Comment. Regulating the use and sharing of energy consumption data: assessing California’s SB 1476 smart meter privacy statute. 75 Alb. L. Rev. 341-377 (2011/2012).

Fremeth, Adam R. and Guy L.F. Holburn. Information asymmetries and regulatory decision costs: an analysis of U.S. electric utility rate changes 1980-2000. 28 J.L. Econ. & Org. 127-162 (2012).

McAllister, Lesley K. Adaptive mitigation in the electric power sector. 2011 BYU L. Rev. 2115-2155 (2011).

McNeil, Sonia K. Note. Privacy and the modern grid. 25 Harv. J.L. & Tech. 199-224 (2011).

Reilly, Lauren. Note. Automatic consumer privacy rights embedded in smart grid technology standards by the federal government. 36 Vt. L. Rev. 471-501 (2011).

Rogers, Emily and Rachael K. Jones. Recent development. Water quality and utilities. 41 Tex. Envtl. L.J. 337-342 (2011).

ENERGY POLICY.

Cox, Prentiss. Keeping pace?: the case against property assessed clean energy financing programs. 83 U. Colo. L. Rev. 83-122 (2011).

Padis, George M. Note. Overcoming the “energy paradox” in the built environment. 42 Tex. Envtl. L.J. 85-108 (2011).

Vaheesan, Sandeep. Preempting parochialism and protectionism in power. 49 Harv. J. on Legis. 87-134 (2012).

ENFORCEMENT.

Stafford, Sarah L. Private policing of environmental performance: does it further public goals? 39 B.C. Envtl. Aff. L. Rev. 73-97 (2012).

ENVIRONMENTAL ACTIVISM.

Gormley, Neil. Greening the law of advertising: prospects and problems. 42 Tex. Envtl. L.J. 27-58 (2011).

ENVIRONMENTAL LAW.

Chin, Francis and Maxim Farberov. Recent development. Publications. 41 Tex. Envtl. L.J. 350-352 (2011).

Klein, David J. and Tim Redmond. Recent development. Casenotes: federal. 41 Tex. Envtl. L.J. 346-348 (2011).

LaValle, Laura and Madeline Mathews. Recent development. Washington update. 41 Tex. Envtl. L.J. 352-355 (2011).

Slobodin, Howard S. and Sarah Page Jackson. Recent development. Casenotes: state. 41 Tex. Envtl. L.J. 348-350 (2011).

FEDERALISM.

Fischman, Robert L. and Jeremiah I. Williamson. The story of Kleppe v. New Mexico: the Sagebrush Rebellion as un-cooperative federalism. 83 U. Colo. L. Rev. 123-178 (2011).

FISHERIES.

George, Mary. Fisheries protections in the context of the geo-political tensions in the South China Sea. 43 J. Mar. L. & Com. 85-128 (2012).

Taking Stock: The Magnuson-Stevens Act Revisited. Articles by Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse, Eric Schwaab, Peter Shelley and Anne Hayden. 17 Roger Williams U. L. Rev. 7-80 (2012).

GREENHOUSE GASES.

Cecot, Caroline. Note. Blowing hot air: an analysis of state involvement in greenhouse gas litigation. 65 Vand. L. Rev. 189-248 (2012).

Riccardi, Nathan D. Note. Necessarily hypocritical: the legal viability of EPA’s regulation of stationary source greenhouse gas emissions under the Clean Air Act. (Massachusetts v. EPA, 549 U.S. 497, 2007.) 39 B.C. Envtl. Aff. L. Rev. 213-241 (2012).

Weil, Gabriel. Note. Costs, contributions, and climate change: how important are universally binding emissions commitments? 23 Geo. Int’l Envtl. L. Rev. 319-344 (2011).

HERITAGE SITES.

Horgan, Danielle E. Note. Reconciling the past with the future: the Cape Wind Project and the National Historic Preservation Act. 36 Vt. L. Rev. 409-432 (2011).

HYDRAULIC FRACTURING.

Coman, Hannah. Note. Balancing the need for energy and clean water: the case for applying strict liability in hydraulic fracturing suits. 39 B.C. Envtl. Aff. L. Rev. 131-160 (2012).

INTERNATIONAL LAW.

Puder, Markus G. The rise of regional integration law (RIL): good news for international environmental law (IEL)? 23 Geo. Int’l Envtl. L. Rev. 165-210 (2011).

INTERNATIONAL TRADE.

Atik, Jeffery. Inventing trade remedies In response to climate change. 18 Sw. J. Int’l L. 53-63 (2011).

Hsu, Shi-Ling. A prediction market for climate outcomes. 83 U. Colo. L. Rev. 179-256 (2011).

LAND USE.

Been, Vicki. Community benefits agreements: a new local government tool or another variation on the exactions theme? 77 U. Chi. L. Rev. 5-35 (2010).

Sun, Lisa Grow. Smart growth in dumb places: sustainability, disaster, and the future of the American city. 2011 BYU L. Rev. 2157-2201 (2011).

LEGAL PROCESS.

Evans, Danieli. Note. Concrete private interest in regulatory enforcement: tradable environmental resource rights as a basis for standing. 29 Yale J. on Reg. 201-243 (2012).

Mank, Bradford C. Informational standing after Summers. 39 B.C. Envtl. Aff. L. Rev. 1-54 (2012).

MARITIME LAW.

Anderson, Charles B. Marine pollution and the “polluter pays” principle: should the polluter also pay punitive damages? 43 J. Mar. L. & Com. 43-58 (2012).

NATURAL RESOURCES.

Hooks, Aileen M. and student Julie Patel. Recent development. Natural resources. 42 Tex. Envtl. L.J. 111-113 (2011).

Hooks, Aileen M. and Zachary Rider. Recent development. Natural resources. 41 Tex. Envtl. L.J. 330-334 (2011).

Natural Resources and Environmental Law. Articles by Eric Biber, Prentiss Cox, Robert L. Fischman, Jeremiah I. Williamson and Shi-Ling Hsu; comments by Justin Plaskov and Chris Reagen. 83 U. Colo. L. Rev. 1-338 (2011).

NEPA.

Garfinkle, Jesse. Note. Scope of reviewable evidence in NEPA predetermination cases: why going off the record puts courts on target. 39 B.C. Envtl. Aff. L. Rev. 161-184 (2012).

Holcomb, James R., IV. NEPA and climate change: after the CEQ’s draft guidance. 41 Tex. Envtl. L.J. 259-278 (2011).

NUCLEAR ENERGY.

Davies, Lincoln L. Beyond Fukushima: disasters, nuclear energy, and energy law. 2011 BYU L. Rev. 1937-1989 (2011).

Fahring, T.L. Note. Nuclear uncertainty: a look at the uncertainties of a U.S. nuclear renaissance. 41 Tex. Envtl. L.J. 279-307 (2011).

Zeidan, Sayed. The procedural rules and obligations under international law for construction of a nuclear installation: prevention and reduction of environmental damage. 23 Geo. Int’l Envtl. L. Rev. 263-318 (2011).

OCEANS.

Emerging Issue: Coastal and Marine Spatial Planning. Articles by Grover Fugate, David E. Frulla, George M. Hagerman, Jr., Michele G. Hallowell, Robert Thompson and student David M. DiSegna. 17 Roger Williams U. L. Rev. 295-372 (2012).

Pettit, David and David Newman. Federal public law and the future of oil and gas drilling on the outer continental shelf. 17 Roger Williams U. L. Rev. 184-220 (2012).

OIL SPILLS.

Blowout: Legal Legacy of the Deepwater Horizon Catastrophe. Articles by Sen. Jack Reed, Juliet Eilperin, Deborah E. Greenspan, Matthew A. Neuburger, George W. Conk, David Pettit, David Newman, Sidney A. Shapiro, Julia B. Wyman and Thomas C. Galligan, Jr. 17 Roger Williams U. L. Rev. 81-294 (2012).

Craig, Robin Kundis. Legal remedies for deep marine oil spills and long-term ecological resilience: a match made in hell. 2011 BYU L. Rev. 1863-1897 (2011).

Galligan, Thomas C., Jr. A sad tale of the Deepwater Horizon disaster, normal accidents, and our appetite for risk. 17 Roger Williams U. L. Rev. 264-294 (2012).

Higgens, Mark M. Note. Do as I say and not as I do: the United States’ immunity in oil spill response actions. 45 Suffolk U.L. Rev. 149-168 (2011).

RIVERS.

Giles, Morgan. Comment. A call to action: expanding public access to Ohio’s navigable rivers and streams. 39 Cap. U. L. Rev. 993-1025 (2011).

Harris, Susan. Note. “Pigs will fly”: protecting the Los Angeles River by declaring navigability. 39 B.C. Envtl. Aff. L. Rev. 185-212 (2012).

SOLID WASTE.

Abazari, Ali and Alyssa Nava. Recent development. Solid waste. 41 Tex. Envtl. L.J. 334-336 (2011).

Abazari, Ali and student Michael Pena. Recent development. Solid waste. 42 Tex. Envtl. L.J. 114-117 (2011).

SUPERFUND.
Gershonowitz, Aaron. The end of joint and several liability in Superfund litigation: from Chem-Dyne to Burlington Northern. 50 Duq. L. Rev. 83-124 (2012).

TAKINGS.

Andrews, Trent. Comment. Official maps and the regulatory takings problem: a legislative solution. 2011 BYU L. Rev. 2251-2281 (2011).

Frame, Ian M. Note. If you build it, he will come: judicial takings and a search for common ground. (Stop the Beach Renourishment, Inc. v. Fla. Dep’t of Envtl. Prot., 130 S. Ct. 2592, 2010.) 6 Liberty U. L. Rev. 109-135 (2011).

TORTS.

Greenspan, Deborah E. and Matthew A. Neuburger. Settle or sue? The use and structure of alternative compensation programs in the mass claims context. 17 Roger Williams U. L. Rev. 97-136 (2012).

WATER LAW.

Smith, Robin and Catherine Bennett. Recent development. Water rights. 41 Tex. Envtl. L.J. 342-345 (2011).

WATER RESOURCES.

Pannu, Camille. Comment. Drinking water and exclusion: a case study from California’s Central Valley. 100 Cal. L. Rev. 223-268 (2012).

Rogers, Emily and students Nick Ybarra and Maxim Farberov. Recent development. Water quality and utilities. 42 Tex. Envtl. L.J. 117-126 (2011).

ZONING.

Hills, Roderick M., Jr. and David Schleicher. The steep costs of using noncumulative zoning to preserve land for urban manufacturing. 77 U. Chi. L. Rev. 249-273 (2010).

Tuesday, May 22, 2012

Rediscovering Higher Education's Role in the Earth Community -- ECCU

Please mark your calendar to attend the Environmental Consortium of Colleges and Universities’ 9th Annual Conference on Saturday, October 27, 2012 at Marist College in Poughkeepsie, NY.

“Rediscovering Higher Education’s Role in the Earth Community” will honor Father Thomas Berry whose teachings inspired the formation of the Environmental Consortium in 2004.

• Presentation of the Inaugural Thomas Berry Great Work Award (Nominations due May 30th)

• Plenaries and Breakouts (details to follow)

• Student and Faculty Inter and Multi-Disciplinary Poster Session

Sponsored by Marist College and Pace University's Pace Academy for Applied Environmental Studies

The Thomas Berry Great Work Award -- Nominations

The Thomas Berry Great Work Award, the Environmental Consortium of Colleges and Universities seeks nominations for the Thomas Berry Great Work Award. Deadline for submissions: May 30, 2012

The Thomas Berry Great Work Award recognizes individuals in higher education whose work exemplifies Berry’s admonition that colleges and universities should “reorient the human community toward a greater awareness that the human exists, survives, and becomes whole only within the single great community of the planet Earth.”

The work of such individuals from within the Hudson and Mohawk River bioregional community has nurtured progress and prosperity of the entire life community.

The award is named for and honors Thomas Berry, whose vision for the role of the university in a New Cosmology that celebrates the inherent interconnectedness of humans and nature, inspired the formation of the Environmental Consortium in 2004.

The mission of the Environmental Consortium is to harness higher education’s intellectual and physical resources to advance regional, ecosystem-based environmental research, teaching, and learning through interdisciplinary, collaborative programs and information sharing.

Monday, May 21, 2012

America's Most Endangered Rivers for 2012 -- American Rivers

America's Most Endangered Rivers for 2012, this report from American Rivers states that several U.S. rivers are endangered. these are selected based upon the following criteria:

A major decision (that the public can help influence) in the coming year on the proposed action;
The significance of the river to human and natural communities;
The magnitude of the threat to the river and associated communities, especially in light of a changing climate

The report highlights ten rivers whose fate will be decided in the coming year, and encourages decision-makers to do the right thing for the rivers and the communities they support. It presents alternatives to proposals that would damage rivers, identifies those who make the crucial decisions, and points out opportunities for the public to take action on behalf of each listed river.

EPA's Pretense of Science: Regulating Phantom Risks -- Texas Public Policy Foundation

EPA's Pretense of Science: Regulating Phantom Risks -- In this report (May 2012) theTexas Public Policy Foundation found that [from the press release] "For the last three years, the EPA has justified a series of strict and incredibly expensive new air quality regulations on the assumption that even trace levels of particulate matter can accelerate death...But the science behind the EPA's new approach to assessing health risks is deeply flawed and misleads the public."

Since 2009, the EPA has attributed risk of "early death" or shortened lifespan from fine particulate matter (PM 2.5) concentrations far below the health protective national standards and even below natural levels that would occur absent human activity. The EPA is justifying the many unprecedented new regulations commonly known as the EPA train wreck on the basis of the health benefits gained from reducing these new risks from already low levels of particulate matter – a substantial portion of which is airborne dust.

The new regulations, however, target other pollutants and not PM 2.5. In the recently finalized rule to reduce mercury emission from power plants, EPA estimated 99.9 percent of the health benefits derive from coincidental reduction of particulate matter at levels far below the already conservative federal standard. Without this methodology, the cost of reducing mercury would be far higher than the benefits of further reduction of mercury.
In the report, White challenged four key assumptions at the root of the EPA's new risk-assessment methodology:

PM 2.5 causes early death.
There is no level of PM 2.5 below which risks of premature death cease.
The EPA's new rules are necessary to prevent hundreds of thousands of deaths.
Coincidental reduction of PM 2.5 is sufficient justification for new regulations designed to control other pollutants.

"The EPA's manipulation of cost-benefit analyses to project massive benefits at comparatively modest cost denies policymakers and the public the information needed to weigh the many trade-offs involved in complex societal decisions about unacceptable risks," White said. "Economic impact does matter, and it matters to human health. Life span and health are strongly correlated with the opportunity to work and make a good income."

The report recommends amendment of the Clean Air Act to establish minimal criteria for rigorous scientific risk assessment of health effects.

Fact Sheet: G-8 Action on Energy and Climate Change -- U.S. President

Fact Sheet: G-8 Action on Energy and Climate Change from the White House (May 21, 2012) is a G-8 communique that sets forth agreement over energy and environmental concerns.

Third Symposium on Advanced Legal Topics in Land Conservation -- Land Trust Alliance CLE

Third Symposium on Advanced Legal Topics in Land Conservation June 11-12, 2012 | Charleston, SC.

Gather with your colleagues to take advantage of this rare opportunity to discuss and contribute insight on these complex legal issues:
• Using common sense and administrative discretion in stewardship decisions
• Translating the flurry of Tax Court decisions into conservation documents
• Considering the legal and governance implications of creative financing and unusual transactions
• Litigating conservation disputes and perspective on records and evidence
• Exercising due diligence in mitigation projects for land trusts
• Discussing technical details relating to whether current oil and gas extraction practices are consistent with upholding conservation purposes

All while earning your CLE’s!

Landscapes: Improving Conservation Practice in the Northeast Megaregion -- RPA and America 2050

Landscapes: Improving Conservation Practice in the Northeast Megaregion from the Regional Plan Association and American 2050 (Feb. 2012) finds that "Buying land isn’t enough. Building parks

won’t get it done. Restoring forests and wetlands by themselves is not an answer. Successful conservation requires a comprehensive, regional approach.

Landscape conservation means looking beyond property boundaries and political jurisdictions.... With funding scarce, it’s also crucial to build partnerships that can set mutual priorities, share resources and collaborate effectively....

This is especially true for complex geographies like the 13-state Northeast megaregion.... Its cities, suburbs and rural areas are expected to add an additional 15 million people by the year 2040. Where these people are housed, and how their transportation and energy needs are met, will dictate whether the region’s wildlife, drinking water and other resources, farms and forests, and outdoor recreational opportunities are truly lasting.

Landscape conservation initiatives can bring together the diverse interests critical for conservation success in the Northeast and elsewhere.... Such collaboration can enable the conservation community to align protection and management of individual properties while providing a platform for engaging non-traditional partners in their work.

This report offers a summary of the work landscape conservation initiatives are doing in the Northeast megaregion. Specific examples on how landscape practitioners are carrying out their work are highlighted throughout the document.... The survey was used to identify the major challenges facing landscape conservation, including urban growth and land-use change, investments in transportation, water and energy infrastructure, climate change and limited funding for conservation and management.... Maps and analyses of infrastructure investments, energy resources and climate change similarly help paint a mega-regional-scale picture of challenges and opportunities.

Unconventional Oil and Gas Production: Opportunities and Challenges of Oil Shale Development -- GAO

Unconventional Oil and Gas Production:Opportunities and Challenges of Oil Shale Development (GAO-12-740T, May 10, 2012) found "In its October 2010 report, GAO noted that oil shale development presents the following opportunities for the United States:

Increasing domestic oil production. Tapping the vast amounts of oil locked within U.S. oil shale formations could go a long way toward satisfying the nation’s future oil demands. Oil shale deposits in the Green River Formation are estimated to contain up to 3 trillion barrels of oil, half of which may be recoverable, which is about equal to the entire world’s proven oil reserves.

Socioeconomic benefits. Development of oil shale resources could lead to the creation of jobs, increases in wealth, and increases in tax and royalty payments to federal and state governments for oil produced on their lands. The extent of these benefits, however, is unknown at this time because the ultimate size of the industry is uncertain.

In addition to these opportunities and the uncertainty of not yet having an economical and environmentally viable commercial scale technology, the following challenges should also be considered:

Impacts on water, air, and wildlife. Developing oil shale and providing power for oil shale operations and other activities will require large amounts of water and could have significant impacts on the quality and quantity of surface and groundwater resources. In addition, construction and mining activities during development can temporarily degrade air quality in local areas. There can also be long-term regional increases in air pollutants from oil shale processing and the generation of additional electricity to power oil shale development operations. Oil shale operations will also require the clearing of large surface areas of topsoil and vegetation which can affect wildlife habitat, and the withdrawal of large quantities of surface water which could also negatively impact aquatic life.

Socioeconomic impacts. Oil shale development can bring an influx of workers, who along with their families can put additional stress on local infrastructure such as roads, housing, municipal water systems, and schools. Development from expansion of extractive industries, such as oil shale or oil and gas, has typically followed a “boom and bust” cycle, making planning for growth difficult for local governments. Moreover, traditional rural uses would be displaced by industrial uses and areas that rely on tourism and natural resources would be negatively impacted.

GAO’s 2010 report found that federal research efforts on the impacts of oil shale development did not provide sufficient data for future monitoring and that there was a greater need for collaboration among key federal stakeholders to address water resources and research issues. Specifically, Interior and DOE officials generally have not shared information on their oil shale research efforts, and there was a need for the federal agencies to improve their collaboration and develop more comprehensive baseline information related to water resources in the region. GAO made three recommendations to Interior, which the department generally concurred with and has already begun to take actions to address.

Air Emissions and Electricity Generation at U.S. Power Plants -- GAO

Air Emissions and Electricity Generation at U.S. Power Plants (GAO-12-545R, Apr 18, 2012) found that "Older electricity generating units—those that began operating in or before 1978—provided 45 percent of electricity from fossil fuel units in 2010 but produced a disproportionate share of emissions, both in aggregate and per unit of electricity generated. Overall, in 2010 older units contributed 75 percent of sulfur dioxide emissions, 64 percent of nitrogen oxides emissions, and 54 percent of carbon dioxide emissions from fossil fuel units. For each unit of electricity generated, older units collectively emitted about 3.6 times as much sulfur dioxide, 2.1 times as much nitrogen oxides, and 1.3 times as much carbon dioxide as newer units.

The difference in emissions between older units and their newer counterparts may be attributed to a number of factors. First, 93 percent of the electricity produced by older fossil fuel units in 2010 was generated by coal-fired units. Compared with natural gas units, coal-fired units produced over 90 times as much sulfur dioxide, twice as much carbon dioxide and over five times as much nitrogen oxides per unit of electricity, largely because coal contains more sulfur and carbon than natural gas.

Second, fewer older units have installed emissions controls, which reduce emissions by limiting their formation or capturing them after they are formed. Among coal-fired units—which produce nearly all sulfur dioxide emissions from electric power generation—approximately 26 percent of older units used controls for sulfur dioxide, compared with 63 percent of newer units. Controls for nitrogen oxide emissions were more common among all types of fossil fuel units, but these controls vary widely in their effectiveness. Among older units, 14 percent had installed selective catalytic reduction (SCR) equipment, the type of control capable of reducing the greatest amount of nitrogen oxides emissions, compared with 33 percent of newer units. In addition, approximately 38 percent of older units did not have any controls for nitrogen oxides, compared with 6 percent of newer units.

Third, lower emissions among newer units may be attributable in part to improvements in the efficiency with which newer units convert fuel into electricity. Nonetheless, older units remain an important part of the electricity generating sector, particularly in certain regions of the United States."